From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4E7D171652; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 13:15:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714482951; cv=none; b=ggDynkErimkRhL/VYTwXFkN5FmdvUKSjgV9GlXl4nlJKWhGRfxj2G8KkBb5AXrCUJTAk4VsabRMarALCFMOXpS1xMThni5h88btE6vY1HKK20kN5d2e9VAEb91eLnilPxCu/7Cv/Cq45l8KnBl6r6ZYnL6/DwdxznK63oM7yNq8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714482951; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NHFBbVYd6TqTEjk1e1f5A0cfaZCmIdAdIEDCn7WWWAo=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ca1LgeroFt06ADejHXbnjU5m/4qh9BI3nEjSgXLMen3CxTYqHSysvNqkl30kLEUw7FCOaU7Ec3/5O4NWMzZzeYlqGLlKF45lXoIgLH3zBtHXGHPjJBC6JdATVf0pL5L9dLwVkqLSTdmiIUOeu+cT8tDW1SEMNWZuLWZmyRI0OV0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=OIL2DXpZ; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=oexfdXF7; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=OIL2DXpZ; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=oexfdXF7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="OIL2DXpZ"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="oexfdXF7"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="OIL2DXpZ"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="oexfdXF7" Received: from knuth.suse.de (unknown [10.168.5.16]) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 076FA1F7E0; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 13:15:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1714482948; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ZlpGECdT+c9Qy7blIqpDlDNH0IDa2wwkY1+icJBCQMk=; b=OIL2DXpZNEEr94TEdAEsTW+iMBzmiTO9VnD6nOFODgHkwRxxoHq24SfX6kL0qLP7vlgftN wAjIUajMIn7FeGki1yYE4869OcpjvHFb5DhAsycun9cdCrLRtbkJgnY1BRSUV9wNv3NhpV i5VWL01zMFDJSRreMkpELzYrKr9myRc= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1714482948; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ZlpGECdT+c9Qy7blIqpDlDNH0IDa2wwkY1+icJBCQMk=; b=oexfdXF7vxm3RzDmBdVyDlQ8D/V34MIirTD8A51WKZ6+GUod+mTvf3j2u9UWF42DDLhxsW v2lFFNNwUqXhiyCw== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1714482948; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ZlpGECdT+c9Qy7blIqpDlDNH0IDa2wwkY1+icJBCQMk=; b=OIL2DXpZNEEr94TEdAEsTW+iMBzmiTO9VnD6nOFODgHkwRxxoHq24SfX6kL0qLP7vlgftN wAjIUajMIn7FeGki1yYE4869OcpjvHFb5DhAsycun9cdCrLRtbkJgnY1BRSUV9wNv3NhpV i5VWL01zMFDJSRreMkpELzYrKr9myRc= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1714482948; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ZlpGECdT+c9Qy7blIqpDlDNH0IDa2wwkY1+icJBCQMk=; b=oexfdXF7vxm3RzDmBdVyDlQ8D/V34MIirTD8A51WKZ6+GUod+mTvf3j2u9UWF42DDLhxsW v2lFFNNwUqXhiyCw== Received: by knuth.suse.de (Postfix, from userid 10510) id EC48A3506FA; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:15:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by knuth.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCD2C3506F9; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:15:47 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:15:47 +0200 (CEST) From: Michael Matz To: Jiri Slaby cc: Borislav Petkov , Ard Biesheuvel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Ard Biesheuvel , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Bill Wendling , Justin Stitt , Song Liu , Ricardo Ribalda , Fangrui Song , Arthur Eubanks , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/purgatory: Switch to the position-independent small code model In-Reply-To: <4ce6cf96-685d-4792-b2fd-949c07eff707@kernel.org> Message-ID: <5199b4f0-b4c7-5ef4-e8b7-0ade7c533edd@suse.de> References: <20240418201705.3673200-2-ardb+git@google.com> <3f23b551-4815-4a06-9217-ff5beeb80df2@kernel.org> <20240420131717.GAZiPAXY9EAYnHajaw@fat_crate.local> <836c267f-a028-acce-8b19-180162a5febc@suse.de> <4ce6cf96-685d-4792-b2fd-949c07eff707@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Level: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.81 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-2.61)[98.29%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-0.989]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWELVE(0.00)[15]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[git]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[] X-Spam-Score: -3.81 X-Spam-Flag: NO Hello, On Tue, 30 Apr 2024, Jiri Slaby wrote: > >> Interesting. I thought gcc doesn't have problems here yet and was > >> talking to Matz on Thu about it and it seems he's forgotten about his > >> statement too that "you should simply stop using -mcmodel=large. Noone > >> should use it." :-) > > > > It may be so ingrained in my brain that I'm not _always_ saying it when > > talking about the large code model over a beer. And indeed I know of no > > particular problems with it vis GCC, > > Of course you do :). :-P > That bsc#1211853 I linked earlier. I.e. gcc-13 + > -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 + -mcmodel=large + some asm() expecting __FILE__ to be > constant (not true with the large model). "asm() expecting $whatever" - clearly a user problem, not a GCC problem ;-) Ciao, Michael.